Monday, July 17, 2017

When amazon.com bans books or YouTube takes down videos, there is
the widespread perception that nothing can be done about it because they are
private corporations. Because they are not “state actors”, they are generally believed
to be entitled to take-downs of books and videos, even when those actions are capricious
or arbitrary. But just as the Civil Rights Movement taught us, there are
constraints on the actions of private entities when their actions violate state
or federal laws. That is not permissible.

The pattern that has emerged from their recent practices of banning
books and censoring YouTube videos about the purported Sandy Hook child shooting
massacre of 14 December 2012, which the book, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), and those YouTube
videos demonstrate to have been a FEMA drill presented as a LIVE event, provides proof that
amazon.com and YouTube have become accessories after the fact to fraud and theft by
deception and therefore both appear to be liable to criminal prosecution.

In
order to establish that amazon.com and YouTube are accessories after the fact, they have to be proven to have
acted to assist parties (1) who have committed afelony, (2) after the party has committed
the felony, (3) with knowledge that the party committed the felony, and (4)
with the intent to help the party avoid arrest or punishment. An accessory
after the fact may be held liable for,inter alia,obstruction
of justice.

Felonies are crimes punishable by more than a year in
prison or by death. In the case of Sandy Hook, participants assumed the roles
of the survivors of victims of a shooting, which did not in fact take place.
With the collusion of FEMA, the Connecticut State Police, the Medical Examiner
and parties in the state and federal government, they ran a scam on the public
and, by gaining their sympathy, received at least $28m in donations, $1.5m from the Lanza
Estate
and other items of value, including 65,000 Teddy Bears.

Assuming an equitable division between the surviving families of
the twenty children and six adults who were alleged to have died at Sandy Hook,
that is over $1m per family, which would be generally acknowledged to be quite
a handsome take from feigning to have lost a child during a FEMA drill. And
this does not take into account a $50m grant from the State
of Connecticut to the Newtown School Board to build a new elementary school or
other compensation to others who also participated in the elaborate charade.

When amazon.com banned NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), which includes chapters by thirteen (13) contributors, including six
(6) current or retired Ph.D. college professors, demonstrating that the school
had been closed by 2008 and was not compliant with state and federal laws under
the Americans with Disabilities Act. It could not have been legally operating
in CT in 2012, I released it to the public for free as a pdf, where it remains available to this day.

Remarkably, Wolfgang Halbig's dogged pursuit of the truth resulted in the stunning admission, under oath, by Patricia Llorda, the First Selectman of Newtown (a position equivalent to Mayor), that the sign, "Everyone must check it!", was placed there by the Department of Homeland Security, which would not have been present had this not been a FEMA drill. (James Tracy has blogged about this, including the complete FEMA manual, which you can download there.)

Even the back cover includes proof that the celebrated photograph
taken by Shannon Hicks, a photographer/editor for The Newtown Bee, was not
taken during an emergency evacuation but was staged, where an earlier photo
(she has also admitted to having taken) shows a purported “police woman”
rearranging the kids in the line “to get a better shot” while multiple parents
casually look on with their hands in their pockets and arms folded.

The YouTube videos that have been taken down include “The Real Deal
must see Sandy Hook Update” (uploaded 5 February 2017) now removed:

As Chance George had notified me, this has been one of my most
popular videos about Sandy Hook, no doubt because it proves that nobody died:

Another video of mine, “The Real Deal: Sandy Hook 2017 A New Witness” (Part 1 and Part 2), was removed from the web site, American Nightmare, ostensibly for
violating “Community Guidelines”; but when you compare the content of the video
with the guidelines, there does not appear to be any violation thereof but
extensive and detailed proof that “the Sandy Hook shooting” was a hoax.

And when you consult YouTube’s stated policy on harassment and
bullying,

No one who read the book, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), or who
watched the YouTube, “The Real Deal special MUST SEE Sandy Hook Update” or “The
Real Deal: Sandy Hook 2017 A New Witness”, and understood their content could
be unaware that the Sandy Hook shooting was an elaborate hoax. Indeed, the book
includes the FBI Consolidated Statistics for Murder in 2012, which confirms
that there were no murders in Newtown during 2012 and therefore none in Sandy
Hook, a subdivision:

where this can be found on several pages of the book, including
166-167.

Lenny Pozner, who claims to be the father of Noah, has been
aggressive in attacking web sites and students of Sandy Hook who have been
doing their best to inform the public that Sandy Hook was an elaborate charade.
Some such as James Tracy, formerly Associate Professor of Media and Mass Communications
at Florida Atlantic University, have even paid for it with their positions
because of baseless attacks appealing to popular beliefs about Sandy Hook,
which may be sincerely held but are provably false.

And some of the nation’s leading institutions, such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, and even The Chronicle of Higher
Education, have published articles about James Tracy based upon information
they know to be false but publish anyway in reckless disregard of the truth to
perpetuate this massive fraud on the American people, as I have demonstrated
again and again and again. And this elaborate charade appears to be driven by
the desire to advance the Barack Obama/Eric Holder gun-control agenda.

As the book explains, Eric Holder visited with
Gov. Dannel Malloy on 27 November 2012, during which he appears to have
informed him that they were going to take an abandoned school, conduct a drill
and present it as a LIVE event to promote gun control. On 16 January 2013,
Obama signed 23 executive orders to limit access to weapons under the 2nd
Amendment. Joe Biden seems to have confided in the Mayor of Boston, Thomas
Menino, that, “by
January 2013, gun control in the US would be a done deal”:

The pattern of suppression of information that would expose the
fraud and theft by deception (of which amazon.com and YouTube cannot possibly
be unaware) extends to other students of Sandy Hook, including those using the
handles “PeeKay Truth”, “Barry Soetero” and “RedSilver J”, as Harold Saive
informed me when YouTube’s crack down on research on Sandy Hook began to take a
virulent form. While I was wrong to suggest this is a “clear violation of the
First Amendement”, which applies to government actions in relation to the
people, I had not yet come to the realization that they are accessories after
the fact to crimes of fraud and theft by deception:

As one example of the brilliant work they have performed, Barry
Soetero discovered that one of the alleged “Sandy Hook parents”, David Wheeler,

was playing two roles at Sandy Hook, one as a grieving father, the
other as a SWAT team member, walking up and down Dickinson Drive carrying his
rifle upside down by the magazine. This was such blatant incompetence that it
had to be taken down. Obama would fly him and his wife, Francine, to Washington
to make an emotional address from the Oval Office, no less:

For amazon.com and YouTube to be accessories after the fact to
crimes of fraud and of theft by deception, those crimes must have been
committed by the Sandy Hook players, including the parents, especially, who
benefitted financially from generous donations by sympathetic but gullible
Americans.

Consider the legal definition of “fraud”. Here is one for the crime
of “fraud”:

Fraud. A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by wordsor byconduct, by false or
misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been
disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the
individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury.

Can there be any doubt that the Sandy Hook players, including the
CT State Police, the Medical Examiner, and the parents, among others, were
engaged in an elaborate fraud, which appears to have been planned by the Obama
administration, even to the extent of nullifying the Smith-Mundt Act to make
the use of propaganda and disinformation against the American people legal in
the United States? Here is another for “theft by deception”:

Theft
by deception generally means the use
of deception to obtain
control over the property or services of another. The following is an example
of a state statute governing theft
by deception: Theft by
deception. A person commits theft if
he obtains property of another by deception.

We know that the book, NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015), proves this was a two-day
FEMA drill presented to the public as a live event. We know that no children or
adults died there and that it was done to promote gun control. It was even
confirmed by the Obama administration itself. As Ch. 6 explains, Paul Preston,
who had conducted drills of this kind before, reached out to his contacts in
the Obama Department of Education, who confirmed that it had been a drill, that
no children had died and that it had been done to promote gun control. That
leaves no doubt this was a fraud.

(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue;

(3) intent on the part of the defendant to
deceive the alleged victim;

(4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement; and

(5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.

In the case of the purported Sandy Hook parents, that does not
appear to pose a challenge. They all knew they were participating in a scam and
that their children had not died in a school schooling massacre. The all knew
they were participating with the intent to deceive the public. They all knew
that the donations coming from the public were based on false information. They
all knew that the public was being deceived to benefit themselves.

Lenny Pozner even sent Kelley Watt a “death certificate” for Noah,
which turned out to be a fabrication combining the bottom half of a real certificate
with the top half of fake, which has no file number and even gives a wrong ETD
(“Estimated Time of Death”) as 11 AM, when the shooting ostensibly took place
between 9:30-9:35 AM. Obviously, if Noah had actually died, he would have had a
real death certificate and would not have had to fake it:

Amazon.com and YouTube cannot have not known that the book and the
videos they were banning and censoring provided proof that Sandy Hook was an
elaborate charade. Read the book for yourself. Watch other videos that I have
made about Sandy Hook, which leave no doubt about it. And if the question
becomes of damages suffered, we not only have the public bamboozled out of at
least $28,000,000 but NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK (2015) had sold nearly 500
copies from the date it was placed on sale (22 October 2015) to the date it was
removed (19 November 2015).

Just two days earlier, I had been contacted by a woman claiming to speak forInside Edition, which was interested in covering our research on Sandy Hook. But they wanted to do a pre-interview—and I found myself in (what I now take was) a basement operation at Langley, where I was grilled about the book. In retrospect, I have no doubt that was evaluating our evidence to decide if it had to be banned. This appears to be more proof of the tight relationship between Jeff Bezos and the CIA, wherehe received a $600m contract from the agency that allowed him to purchase The Washington Post.

NOBODY DIED AT SANDY HOOK(2015) sold for $20 in black and white. (The 2ndedition is now available in color atmoonrockbooks.comfor $30.) 500 copies per month x $20 per copy equals $10,000 per month. If calculations of some personal financial damages matters in carrying a case against amazon.com, in particular, it would appear easy to satisfy at an estimated rate of $10,000 per month since November 2015, which as of today would equal about $200,000.

Given that the bulk of the gross (about 2/3 of the total) would have gone back to amazon.com (for distribution and handling) and to its subsidiary, Create Space (for production and administration), the motives behind banning books would have to be rather powerful, indeed. The net that then returns to us provides resources for the honoraria for our contributors and other expenses. The income from books like these are comparatively modest--but they are real.

My motive for publishing these books has never been to make money,
but without revenue, we cannot publish more. The public deserves to know the truth about these events, which are
being conducted as acts of feigned terrorism to instill fear into the American
people to make us amenable to manipulation to promote a political agenda.
It must come to an end. Join me in putting an end to the abuse of media by
publishing falsehoods and suppressing truths about Sandy Hook. The future of
our nation is at stake.

n. the intentional use of
deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its
money, property or a legal right. A party who has lost something due to fraud
is entitled to file a lawsuit for damages against the party acting
fraudulently, and the damages may include punitive damages as a punishment or
public example due to the malicious nature of the fraud. Quite often there are
several persons involved in a scheme to commit fraud and each and all may be
liable for the total damages. Inherent in fraud is an unjust advantage over
another which injures that person or entity. It includes failing to point out a
known mistake in a contract or other writing (such as a deed), or not revealing
a fact which he/she has a duty to communicate, such as a survey which shows
there are only 10 acres of land being purchased and not 20 as originally
understood. Constructive fraud can be proved by a showing of breach of legal
duty (like using the trust funds held for another in an investment in one's own
business) without direct proof of fraud or fraudulent intent. Extrinsic fraud
occurs when deceit is employed to keep someone from exercising a right, such as
a fair trial, by hiding evidence or misleading the opposing party in a lawsuit.
Since fraud is intended to employ dishonesty to deprive another of money,
property or a right, it can also be a crime for which the fraudulent person(s)
can be charged, tried and convicted. Borderline overreaching or taking
advantage of another's naiveté involving smaller amounts is often overlooked by
law enforcement, which suggests the victim seek a "civil remedy"
(i.e., sue). However, increasingly fraud, which has victimized a large segment
of the public (even in individually small amounts), has become the target of
consumer fraud divisions in the offices of district attorneys and attorneys
general.